[lsb-discuss] LSB conf call notes for 2008-05-14

Jeff Licquia jeff at licquia.org
Mon May 19 06:56:44 PDT 2008


Carlos Manuel Duclos Vergara wrote:
> I will try to have one of our lawyers in next conference call, not a promise but
> I'll try.

That would be excellent, thanks.

To move off the point of law:

> So, if the LSB wants to standardize on nss that's ok with us but we are not going to
> support it nor we will drop support for OpenSSL.

Sorry for my complete newbie-ness, but the real name for this is QCA, 
correct?

 From the looks of it, QCA appears to be a relatively stable ABI that 
makes no reference to the underlying implementation.  As such, it could 
be a possible candidate for inclusion as part of the Qt spec.

If that's true, then we could include QCA, and leave the underlying 
crypto lib as an implementation detail.  People wouldn't need to know 
whether OpenSSL or NSS was underneath; they would just write to the QCA API.

This might be a hiccup for Juergen, who wants a unified crypto config 
system, but maybe he and his team (or someone else) could implement an 
unofficial plugin for QCA which hooks it into NSS.  That shouldn't get 
TrollTech into whatever legal trouble they can get into if it's an 
independent implementation.  It could even become the default for Linux 
deployments of Qt, as long as it acted properly.



More information about the lsb-discuss mailing list